From the joannenova.com.au site 3rd October 2015, click the source link at the bottom of this posting to read FULL Article

This article sets out a simple mechanism whereby planetary atmospheres can be rendered thermally stable over time despite huge variations in the atmospheric content of radiatively active molecules such as greenhouse gases, material released by volcanic outbreaks of a vast size, and material vaporized in large asteroid or meteor strikes.

It is established science that convective adjustments can stabilise or neutralise radiative imbalances:

“Radiative equilibrium profile could be unstable; convection restores it to stability (or neutrality)”

and:

Note that the hydrostatic equation depicts the vertical balance of force for a piece of fluid at rest. The balance is between the upward pressure gradient force and downward gravitational force The hydrostatic equation is the vertical component of the momentum equation (Newton’s equation of motion) for the fluid parcel when the forces are in prefect balance and the net acceleration = 0.”

Readers could study that lecture since it explains the concept of hydrostatic balance within atmospheres.

It appears that those climate scientists who apply the radiative gases theory of climate change have overlooked the means by which convection neutralizes radiative imbalances.

Let’s start by looking closely at the tropopause, which is known to undulate upwards above rising air masses and downwards above falling air masses. The height of the tropopause is set by ozone in the stratosphere reacting directly with incoming solar energy so as to create a temperature inversion that blocks further upward convection.

Click the joannenova.com.au link at the bottom of this posting to read FULL Article

Also read the following article by Stephen Wilde at the hockeyschtick.blogspot.co.uk

and is consistent with the cause of the so called greenhouse effect being atmospheric mass held off a surface within a gravitational field and subjected to insolation.

Convective overturning within any horizontal layer of gases around a planet and held off the surface against the force of gravity revolves around the point where the upward pressure gradient force within the atmosphere achieves hydrostatic balance with the downward force of gravity. At that point kinetic energy (KE or heat) matches potential energy (PE which is not heat) in any molecules present.

It is Earth’s surface temperature enhancement of 33K above the temperature predicted by radiative physics that provides the kinetic energy required at the surface to maintain the upward pressure gradient force. That kinetic energy is locked into constant convective overturning and cannot be radiated to space without the mass of the atmosphere falling to the surface.

Stephen Wilde has been a Fellow of the Royal Meteorological Society since 1968. The first five articles from Mr Wilde were received with a great deal of interest throughout the Co2 Sceptic community.

In Stephen Wilde’s sixth and exclusive article for ClimateRealists.com (originally co2sceptics.com) he considers that the IPCC have failed to carry out any risk analysis for the potential for global cooling instead of global warming and that a repeat of the Little Ice Age a mere 400 years ago would cause mass starvation worldwide.

The Death Blow to AGW by Stephen Wilde

The influence of the sun has been discounted in the climate models as a contributor to the warming observed between 1975 and 1998. Those who support the theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW), now known as anthropogenic climate change so that recent cooling can be included in their scenario, always deny that the sun has anything to do with recent global temperature movements.

The reason given is that Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) varied so little over that period that it cannot explain the warming that was observed. I don’t yet accept that TSI tells the whole story because it is ill defined and speculative as regards it’s representation of all the different ways the sun could affect the Earth via the entire available range of physical processes.

Despite the limitations of TSI as an indicator of solar influence I think there are conclusions we can draw from the records we do have. Oddly, I have not seen them discussed properly anywhere else, especially not by AGW enthusiasts.

This above image shows the pattern of TSI from 1611 to 2001.

It is true that, as the alarmists say, since 1961 the average level of TSI has been approximately level if one averages out the peaks and troughs from solar cycles 19 through to 23.

However, those solar cycles show substantially higher levels of TSI than have ever previously occurred in the historical record.

Because of the height of the TSI level one cannot simply ignore it as the IPCC and the modellers have done.

The critical issue is that having achieved such high levels of TSI by 1961 the sun was already producing more heat than was required to maintain a stable Earth temperature. On that basis alone the theory of AGW cannot be sustained and should now die.

Throughout the period 1961 to about 2001, there was a steady cumulative net warming effect from the sun. The fact that the TSI was, on average, level during that period is entirely irrelevant and misleading.

It is hardly likely that such a high level of TSI compared to historical levels is going to have no effect at all on global temperature changes and indeed during most of that period there was an enhanced period of positive Pacific Decadal Oscillation that imparted increasing warmth to the atmosphere. My link below to article 1041 contains details of my view that the sun drives the various oceanic oscillations which in turn drive global temperature variations with all other influences including CO2 being minor and often cancelling themselves out leaving the solar/oceanic driver supreme.

The Ideal Gas Law as set out above is a representation of certain physical relationships and is therefore not about absolute values.

It is widely known how the various terms within that equation respond to changes in any one or more of them,

To summarise:

P and V are inversely proportional to each other so a rise in Pressure results in reduced Volume and vice versa.

Increasing either P or V without reducing the other requires an increase in
n – total atmospheric mass and/or
R – the gas constant which is related to the strength of the gravitational field and/or
T – Temperature.

The product of n, R and T then rises to match the increased product of P and V.

An attempt is made to reconcile the diabatic and adiabatic processes within a planetary atmosphere and in doing so show how changes in the radiative characeristics of constituent molecules in an atmosphere might not have an effect on the equilibrium temperature of the atmosphere and of the surface beneath it.

Applying the proposed scenario would appear to indicate why and how planetary atmospheres adjust themselves to the ideal lapse rate set by gravity despite divergences from that ideal lapse rate within the vertical temperature profile of the atmosphere.

Essentially, the adiabatic and diabatic loops must always match each other on any given planet at equilibrium because they are then of equal size and run at equal speed but are of opposite sign.

Intrinsic to the whole scenario is the fact that the surface temperature of a planet with an atmosphere is fixed by mass, gravity and insolation alone so that changes in the composition of the atmosphere can have no effect.

The proof is the simple established fact that at the same atmospheric pressure the temperatures within the atmospheres of both Earth and Venus are much the same when simply adjusted for their different distances from the sun.

In my previous article (An Accounting Error by Climate Science). I explained why one needs to consider the entire mass of the atmosphere when accounting for the additional warmth retained by planets with atmospheres.

That in itself removes any need for concern about greenhouse gases (GHGs) in our atmosphere because they form such a tiny fraction of the total mass. In particular, our emissions of CO2 add virtually nothing to total atmospheric mass.

I also explained why the extra warmth at the surface is provided by compression of descending air converting potential energy (PE) to kinetic energy (KE) and not from downward radiation from GHGs in the air warming the ground beneath.

We can now take another step and consider the thermal behaviour of GHGs and compare that with the thermal behaviour of non GHGs which form by far the greater proportion of our atmosphere.

Imagine an atmosphere with GHGs and no other gases.

Radiation comes in and is instantly absorbed and re emitted by those GHGs which reach and maintain the maximum temperature possible at that particular level of irradiation due to the constant arrival of new solar input.

50% is instantly radiated upwards and leaves the system for space.

50% is instantly radiated downward, hits the surface which warms and instantly radiates out from the surface again back to space.

The GHGs cannot absorb any of the upward return of radiation from the ground because they are already at the maximum temperature permitted by the incoming solar radiation.

The atmosphere warms the Earth by 33C (some arrive at different numbers but that doesn’t matter here) simply because a quantity of kinetic energy is constantly being recycled up and down within the atmosphere so as to supply additional energy to the surface in addition to incoming solar energy at any given moment.

The cycling process involves the conversion of that kinetic energy to gravitational potential energy and back again. During the up and down cycling process potential energy is not available to the exchange of radiation in and out of the Earth system but it does become available for radiating out to space when it is returned downwards and converted back from potential energy to kinetic energy again at the surface.

Variations in ozone in the lower stratosphere could be the main reason for the global warming seen in the past few decades, according to a new paper in press at the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics. It is claimed that the new model is capable of explaining 82% of the total Earth temperature variability.

Nataliya Kilifarska of the National Institute of Geophysics, Geodesy and Geography, in Sofia, Bulgaria, presents a powerful analysis that confirms a strong relationship between stratospheric ozone and land air temperature.

An abrupt cooling in Europe together with an increase in humidity and particularly in windiness coincided with a sustained reduction in solar activity 2800 years ago. Scientists from the German Research Centre for Geosciences GFZ in collaboration with Swedish and Dutch colleagues provide evidence for a direct solar-climate linkage on centennial timescales. Using the most modern methodological approach, they analysed sediments from Lake Meerfelder Maar, a maar lake in the Eifel/Germany, to determine annual variations in climate proxies and solar activity.

The study published online this week in Nature Geosience (06/05/2012) reports the climatic change that occurred at the beginning of the pre-Roman Iron Age and demonstrates that especially the so-called Grand Minima of solar activity can affect climate conditions in western Europe through changes in regional atmospheric circulation pattern. Around 2800 years ago, one of these Grand Solar Minima, the Homeric Minimum, caused a distinct climatic change in less than a decade in Western Europe.

The exceptional seasonally laminated sediments from the studied maar lake allow a precise dating even of short-term climate changes. The results show for a 200 year long period strongly increased springtime winds during a period of cool and wet climate in Europe. In combination with model studies they suggest a mechanism that can explain the relation between a weak sun and climate change. "The change and strengthening of the tropospheric wind systems likely is related to stratospheric processes which in turn are affected by the ultraviolet radiation" explains Achim Brauer (GFZ), the initiator of the study. "This complex chain of processes thus acts as a positive feedback mechanism that could explain why assumingly too small variations in solar activity have caused regional climate changes."